In the best year for the freight transportation industry since the Great Recession, logistics managers chalk up efficiencies that drive further U.S. economic growth. However, capacity issues persist, causing shippers to worry about rate hikes as carriers continue to be meticulous in their partnerships.

Does your organization struggle with the integration of information between your internal systems, processes and partner portals? You're not alone! Kapow Software alongside EFT has surveyed over 200 organizations regarding the importance of information access, visibility and discusses some of the major goals for supply chain and logistics organizations.

During this webcast we'll explore how supply chain execution convergence (SCEC) helps break down the barriers resulting from disparate, fragmented technology solutions allowing you to more effectively serve customers, adapt to changing business cycles, and save both money and resources.

Last week, the Association of American Railroads said it remains fully committed to implementing Positive Train Control (PTC) even though it noted that myriad challenges stand in the way to get that accomplished by a 2015 deadline.

The objective of PTC systems is to prevent train-to-train collisions, overspeed derailments, and incursions into roadway work limits. PTC sends and receives a continuous stream of data transmitted by wireless signals about the location, speed, and direction of trains, according to the FRA. PTC systems, added the FRA, utilize advanced technologies including digital radio links, global positioning systems and wayside computer control systems that aid dispatchers and train crews in safely managing train movements.

A mandate for PTC systems was included in House and Senate legislation-H.R. 2095/S. 1889, The Rail Safety and Improvement Act of 2008. The legislation was passed shortly after a September 12, 2008 collision between a freight train and a commuter train in Los Angeles. And it calls for passenger and certain hazmat rail lines to take effect by 2015 and authorizes $250 million in Federal grants.

The AAR said that to date railroads have invested more than $1.5 billion in private capital to implement PTC by the 2015 deadline but concede that the challenges in doing so are significant.

“Freight railroads remain committed to implementing PTC and are doing all they can to address the challenges that have surfaced as implementation moves forward,” said Edward R. Hamberger, President and CEO of AAR, in a statement. “The mandate and implementation of PTC is an unprecedented undertaking and, despite nearly a decade of research and development, still faces significant hurdles to deployment. The PTC system being designed and implemented by the railroads and suppliers is being created from scratch and must allow each individual railroad to safely operate on every other carrier’s network. Implementing a technology like this, with so many players, has never been done before.”

AAR officials said that the federal mandate requires that PTC systems must be fully interoperable— or able to seamlessly operate on all railroads’ systems. And it added that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and railroads have been working together to find solutions to technical challenges in order to meet the 2015 deadline, but the FRA, railroads and others have acknowledged that unresolved issues make that date unrealistic.

That was made very clear by a report submitted to Congress by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) in August.

In the report, the FRA stated that although the initial PTC Implementation Plans (PTCIP) submitted by the applicable railroads to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for approval stated they would complete implementation by the 2015 deadline, all of the plans were based on the assumption that there would be no technical or programmatic issues in the design, development, integration, deployment, and testing of the PTC systems they adopted.

“However, since FRA approved the PTCIPs, both freight and passenger railroads have encountered significant technical and programmatic issues that make accomplishment of these plans questionable,” the report noted. “Given the current state of development and availability of the required hardware and software, along with deployment considerations, most railroads will likely not be able to complete full RSIA-required implementation of PTC by December 31, 2015. Partial deployment of PTC can likely be achieved; however, the extent of which is dependent upon successful resolution of known technical and programmatic issues and any new emergent issues.”

The report identified as technical obstacles—to date—relating to PTC implementation: communications spectrum availability; radio availability; design specification availability; back office server and dispatch availability; track database verification; installation engineering; and reliability and availability. And it added that there are two obstacles related to programming, including budgeting and contracting and stakeholder availability.

What’s more, the FRA noted that railroads have raised and expended more than $1.5 billion in private capital to “try and resolve” these issues, while the Federal Government has distributed $50 million through the Railroad Safety Technology Grant Program.

In August 2011, the FRA proposed changes regarding PTC that would benefit participating railroads.

The proposed changes, according to Department of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, would provide greater flexibility to railroads and the FRA in assessing the need for PTC without adversely affecting the safety of America’s rail lines.

FRA officials said these proposed changes would help affected railroads to realize an estimated cost savings of $340 million in the first several years, with total savings of up to $1 billion over a 20 year period by not installing PTC systems on as much as 14,000 miles of track. The FRA added that railroad lines impacted by this proposal have significantly less accident exposure, because they do not carry passenger trains of poison inhalation hazard materials.

The proposed changes, according to Department of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, would provide greater flexibility to railroads and the FRA in assessing the need for PTC without adversely affecting the safety of America’s rail lines.
FRA officials said these proposed changes would help affected railroads to realize an estimated cost savings of $340 million in the first several years, with total savings of up to $1 billion over a 20 year period by not installing PTC systems on as much as 14,000 miles of track. The FRA added that railroad lines impacted by this proposal have significantly less accident exposure, because they do not carry passenger trains of poison inhalation hazard materials.

According to FRA estimates, installing PTC technology will cost more than $5 billion for the freight rail industry to install on more than 73,000 miles of tracks by the 2015 deadline, with total costs coming to more than $13 million when passenger trains are included. What’s more, the FRA has publicly stated that the cost-to-benefit ratio of installing PTC is 20-to-1. And the FRA has stated that safety benefits of PTC coming in at between $440 million and $674 million over a 20-year period.

A report on PTC prepared for the AAR by management consultancy Oliver Wyman stated that without external funding the PTC requirement will remove capital away from capacity expansion and other programs required by railroads at a time when the economic recovery is going to require additional railroad infrastructure. And the report added that the $5 billion cumulative PTC investment required by Class I railroads equals what Class I’s have doled out over the last four years, coupled with them having to spend hundreds of millions of dollars per year to maintain the PTC system.

Oliver Wyman Managing Director Bill Rennicke told LM in a previous interview that the PTC legislation is essentially a safety mandate, which ultimately will be paid for by shippers in the form of increased rates.

“If there are 10,000 unneeded miles and the government is now going back to provide a more accurate adjustment of the area in which the technology will be applied, it benefits everybody, not just carriers, but shippers, too, because it is a very expensive system being put in for safety reasons, not for economic or efficiency reasons,” he explained.

About the Author

Jeff BermanGroup News Editor

Jeff Berman is Group News Editor for Logistics Management, Modern Materials Handling, and Supply Chain Management Review. Jeff works and lives in Cape Elizabeth, Maine, where he covers all aspects of the supply chain, logistics, freight transportation, and materials handling sectors on a daily basis. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Subscribe to Logistics Management magazine

Subscribe today. It's FREE!

Get timely insider information that you can use to better manage yourentire logistics operation.

Recent Entries

While many industry analysts contend that distribution centers near U.S. East Coast ports will see a surge of new business after the Panama Canal expansion, real estate experts say this phenomena is already underway.

A new Government Accountability Office report on the effects of changes to truck driver hours of service rules has sparked a war of words between the American Trucking Associations and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the arm of the Transportation Department that is in charge of making those rules.

The Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) reported this week that U.S. trade with its North America Free Trade Agreement partners Canada and Mexico in May dropped 10.8 percent annually to $92.7 billion, following a 6.8 percent annual decline to $93.3 billion in April.

Rumors of transportation and logistics titan UPS acquiring Chicago-based transportation management services provider Coyote Logistics for $1.8 billion have become a reality, with UPS announcing today that the deal is now official.